From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT,TO_NO_BRKTS_PCNT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!hellgate.utah.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!cod!sampson@cod.nosc.mil From: sampson@cod.nosc.mil (Charles H. Sampson) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Ada Code Efficiency Message-ID: <2860@cod.NOSC.MIL> Date: 22 Feb 91 18:13:14 GMT Sender: sampson@cod.NOSC.MIL Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation List-Id: A few weeks ago I used Cray Ada as an example to show that Ada is not an inherently slow language; I said that the code produced by Cray Ada is outper- forming that produced by Cray FORTRAN. This assessment was objected to by Phillipe Collard, the project manager for Cray Ada at Telesoft. He pointed out that in his presentation at Tri-Ada '90 he only claimed that Cray Ada's code was outperforming Cray FORTRAN's on two sets of benchmarks and that Cray Ada was still behind on scalar operations, but catching up. He furthermore stated that the primary thrust of the Cray Ada effort to date has been to vectorize loops, which it is now doing as well as Cray FORTRAN. Only now are they beginning to concentrate on improving the scalar code. It's certainly refreshing to meet someone so against vaporware that he won't even let a disinterested third party do it for him, but I think Phil- lipe's modesty is a bit excessive. The two benchmarks in question are Whet- stone and Dhrystone! I still think that Cray Ada is a good counterexample to the idea that Ada code is inherently slow. I'll wait for Telesoft to issue an official announce- ment about the scalar code efficiency, rather than give out the current figure that Phillipe gave me. I see no reason why the final figure should be much less than 100%. If constraint checks are suppressed, to let Ada and FORTRAN compete on equal terms, I would expect it to be so close to 100% that any dif- ference is insignificant. Charlie